610
610
Jan 25, 2012
01/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 610
favorite 0
quote 2
warren buffett pays less than his secretary. do we want to keep these tax breaks for the wealthiest of all americans or keep our investment in everything else like education and medical research or a strong military and care for our veterans? because if we are serious about paying down our debt, we can't do both. the american people know what the right choice is. so do i. as i told the speaker this summer, i'm prepared to make more reforms to rein the long-term costs of medicare and medicaid and strengthen social security as long as those programs remain a guarantee for seniors, but in return, we need to change our tax code so people like me and an awful lot of members of congress pay our fair share of taxes. tax reform should follow the buffett rule, if you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30% in taxes and my republican friend tom coburn is right, washington should stop subsidizing millionaires. if you are earning $1 million a year you shouldn't get special subsidies or deductions. if you make unde
warren buffett pays less than his secretary. do we want to keep these tax breaks for the wealthiest of all americans or keep our investment in everything else like education and medical research or a strong military and care for our veterans? because if we are serious about paying down our debt, we can't do both. the american people know what the right choice is. so do i. as i told the speaker this summer, i'm prepared to make more reforms to rein the long-term costs of medicare and medicaid...
139
139
Apr 18, 2012
04/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 139
favorite 0
quote 0
rule and we're told that since warren buffett may pay a lower percentage than his secretary, warren buffett and the president are saying we need to tax the wealthy more. and we found out, the president pays apparently a lower tax rate than his secretary, 20%, compared to a higher percentage than his secretary pays and leaves some of us baffled, if somebody really feels it's fairness or moral issue for warren buffett and the president to pay more in taxes than their secretaries, then at least have the morality to do it. don't come to congress and say, we demand you pass laws to force us to do the morally right thing, because we aren't going to do the morally right thing unless congress passes a law making me warren bivet -- buffett. the fair thing, unless congress passes a law. really? is that what we've come to? that the leader of the free world just down pennsylvania avenue, has to have congress pass a law to get him to do what he says is the moral and fair thing to do? come on. are we in that bad a shape now? i have had within of the smarter economists in the country, art laffer,
rule and we're told that since warren buffett may pay a lower percentage than his secretary, warren buffett and the president are saying we need to tax the wealthy more. and we found out, the president pays apparently a lower tax rate than his secretary, 20%, compared to a higher percentage than his secretary pays and leaves some of us baffled, if somebody really feels it's fairness or moral issue for warren buffett and the president to pay more in taxes than their secretaries, then at least...
154
154
Jan 27, 2012
01/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 154
favorite 0
quote 0
warren buffett pays less than his secretary. i know because she was at the state of the union. she told me. that's not fair. that does not make sense. the reason it is important for us to recognize this is if we are going to reduce our deficit, we have to have a balanced approach that has spending cuts. we have agreed to two trillion dollars worth of spending cuts. i have asked congress for authority to consolidate some of these agencies to make them run better. we will have to be much more effective when it comes to government spending. we are making progress on that front but that alone does not do it. for us to deal with the deficit, we have to look at the other side of the ledger. we -- do we want to keep tax cuts for the wealthiest americans or do we want to invest in things like a strong military, like our children, like our soldiers coming home from iraq and afghanistan. [applause] buffet will, if you make more than a million dollars a year, you should pay a tax rate of at least 30%. which, is lower than they would have been paying under ronald reagan. no one is talking
warren buffett pays less than his secretary. i know because she was at the state of the union. she told me. that's not fair. that does not make sense. the reason it is important for us to recognize this is if we are going to reduce our deficit, we have to have a balanced approach that has spending cuts. we have agreed to two trillion dollars worth of spending cuts. i have asked congress for authority to consolidate some of these agencies to make them run better. we will have to be much more...
78
78
Nov 28, 2012
11/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 78
favorite 0
quote 0
warren buffett said 15.5% yesterday is coming in as revenue. i have heard lower figures. that is the reality of what has happened. we have seen a decline in tax revenue and an increase in spending for a variety of reasons. if we are serious about deficit reduction, we have got to move back the golden 19.6%. let's talk for a minute about what has happened. the chairman of the appropriation committee. let's take a look at where the art today compared to where we were in fiscal year 2001 when the federal government ran a $128 billion surplus. compared to the 2001 figure, we are spending less on non- security concessionary spending than we were. the growth in spending has not been in the non-defense discretionary. the cost of security programs in that same time period has gone up 60%. the cost of mandatory programs is up 30%. i want to call your attention to one aspect progressives need to remind people. of the $1.50 trillion already in spending cuts, $900 billion comes from spending. we have given far more than when it comes to defense side. let's talk about those for a minu
warren buffett said 15.5% yesterday is coming in as revenue. i have heard lower figures. that is the reality of what has happened. we have seen a decline in tax revenue and an increase in spending for a variety of reasons. if we are serious about deficit reduction, we have got to move back the golden 19.6%. let's talk for a minute about what has happened. the chairman of the appropriation committee. let's take a look at where the art today compared to where we were in fiscal year 2001 when the...
86
86
Feb 3, 2012
02/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 86
favorite 0
quote 0
warren buffett said that he had worked with investors for 60 years and he has yet to see anyone, not even when capital gains rates were 39.9% in the midst 1970's, he has never seen someone shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gains. people invest to make money. potential taxes have never scared them off. according to the national income and product account tables, the top tax rate on investment income significantly changed of the past 80 years. in produce big about it. it was -- i heard you speak about it. it is 15% today. yet investment grows with the cycle. chairman, i in your opinion, do changes in the capital gains tax rate mainly affect investments already made rather man new investments being considered -- rather than new investments being considered? what is your opinion? >> you are pulling me into a complex topic. the economic theory says that you should contact consumption rather than savings or investments. that is the rationale for lower rates on capital gains and capital income. that is a theoretical results. there are a variety of
warren buffett said that he had worked with investors for 60 years and he has yet to see anyone, not even when capital gains rates were 39.9% in the midst 1970's, he has never seen someone shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gains. people invest to make money. potential taxes have never scared them off. according to the national income and product account tables, the top tax rate on investment income significantly changed of the past 80 years. in produce...
63
63
Dec 12, 2012
12/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 63
favorite 0
quote 0
even warren buffett, who is been a champion of raising taxes on the wealthy to make sure they pay their fair share, would not raise revenues over 18.5% of gdp. so we need to think about is it necessary, if you get more revenues, how do you ensure they do not go to more spending? what are we talking about taxes right now women have a spending problem? that is what i would like to offer at. >> thank you, very much. it is interesting that when you look at the exigency getting something done, it really is artificial. we have a date that congress put out there. that is what we have to act by. if we do not, we go off a cliff. i'm not suggesting by any stretch that we ought to do that. i am suggesting there is hyperbole on both sides to say we have to act now. they see this as a gate that should not be wasted. a crisis that should not be wasted. i am afraid that in rushing to judgment over an artificial date that the policies get the short shift. i am not suggesting we should go off the cliff. i do not think that is good policy. but these artificial dates have never produced good results. in o
even warren buffett, who is been a champion of raising taxes on the wealthy to make sure they pay their fair share, would not raise revenues over 18.5% of gdp. so we need to think about is it necessary, if you get more revenues, how do you ensure they do not go to more spending? what are we talking about taxes right now women have a spending problem? that is what i would like to offer at. >> thank you, very much. it is interesting that when you look at the exigency getting something done,...
171
171
Feb 15, 2012
02/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 171
favorite 0
quote 0
doesn't matter who you are, warren buffett, or whomever, we're going to have a flat tax. steve forbes said it could be done with a 17% flat tax. even allowing for a mortgage interest deduction, even allowing for charitable deduction. and that way if you've got a flat tax, then warren buffett would not have to sue or his company would not have to sue as it is now to avoid paying the millions or billions in taxes that are alleged to be owed. he wouldn't have to fight the i.r.s. so hard at the same time he's saying he doesn't mind payinging more. it wouldn't be any question. it's a flat tax. just take your income, multiply it by the flat tax, no matter who you are, how much you make, and that will be your tax. because with 53% of americans being the only ones that are paying more in income tax than they get back, we better act in a hurry. because once we cross that line where people who are voting get more from the government than they pay in, we're not coming back absent a miracle of god. so, i am hopeful that the president's going to realize that all the speeches he's been
doesn't matter who you are, warren buffett, or whomever, we're going to have a flat tax. steve forbes said it could be done with a 17% flat tax. even allowing for a mortgage interest deduction, even allowing for charitable deduction. and that way if you've got a flat tax, then warren buffett would not have to sue or his company would not have to sue as it is now to avoid paying the millions or billions in taxes that are alleged to be owed. he wouldn't have to fight the i.r.s. so hard at the...
118
118
Dec 28, 2012
12/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 118
favorite 0
quote 0
i am in the warren buffett camp that believes this is a vote that is a fraudulent vote because it is a vote to say that america will pay the bills it has already incurred. now, i think that ought to be a no-brainer. i think every american would want its country to pay its bills, and we have the ability to pay our bills. i would hope that that would be taken off the table as an issue of partisan divide or used as leverage. it is somewhat like taking your child hostage and saying to somebody else "i will shoot my child if you do not do what i want done." there is no republican leader that does not want to default on our debt. that should be nonpartisan. taking care to pay our debts for a period of time -- and it is not endless -- perhaps is through january and maybe into february, that will be possible, but we should be acting on the debt limit before that, should be acting on it in a bipartisan method. both parties have used this as a partisan talking point. the difference is that no party up until last year, 2011, used it as something they thought was real that resulted in a downgrad
i am in the warren buffett camp that believes this is a vote that is a fraudulent vote because it is a vote to say that america will pay the bills it has already incurred. now, i think that ought to be a no-brainer. i think every american would want its country to pay its bills, and we have the ability to pay our bills. i would hope that that would be taken off the table as an issue of partisan divide or used as leverage. it is somewhat like taking your child hostage and saying to somebody else...
207
207
Feb 3, 2012
02/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 207
favorite 0
quote 0
warren buffett said he had worked with investors for 60 years, and he has yet to see anyone even when capital gains were at 39.1%, he has never seen anyone shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. people invested to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. according to the national income, the top tax rate on investment income significantly changed over the last 80 years, which i have heard you speak about many times. good it is as high as 39.7% in 1976, and now it is 15%. investment grows with the cycle. in your opinion, to changes in the capital gain tax rates mainly affect investments already made rather than new investments being considered? the latter is what drives growth. what is your opinion? >> you are pulling me into a complex topic. ate economic theory says th you should tax consumption rather than savings or investment, and that is the rationale for lower rates on capital gains or capital income. there is a variety of estimates. it is hard to pin it down exactly. there are many other issues. i did not want to be
warren buffett said he had worked with investors for 60 years, and he has yet to see anyone even when capital gains were at 39.1%, he has never seen anyone shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. people invested to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off. according to the national income, the top tax rate on investment income significantly changed over the last 80 years, which i have heard you speak about many times. good it is as...
136
136
Jan 19, 2012
01/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 136
favorite 0
quote 0
buffett does not pay a lower rate in taxes than his secretary, as mr. buffett himself has said. how you get there is a matter that i will leave to the president and others to propose, because tax reform is a -- there are many ways to skin the cat, and it's a complicated process. but the principle of the buffett rule is one that he believes is very important, because it goes right to the situation we were talking about yesterday and that you raise, and that is that it simply, as a matter of fairness, does not make a lot of sense for millionaires and billionaires to be able to pay taxes at a much lower rate than somebody making $100,000 a year or less. and so that is a principle he would bring to bear here. it is particularly -- there are a variety of ways that -- there are a variety of loopholes within the tax code that -- or elements of the tax code, as well as loopholes within it, that create that situation, not least of which -- and he's identified this -- is the carried interest loophole, that allows hedge fund managers and private equity managers to
buffett does not pay a lower rate in taxes than his secretary, as mr. buffett himself has said. how you get there is a matter that i will leave to the president and others to propose, because tax reform is a -- there are many ways to skin the cat, and it's a complicated process. but the principle of the buffett rule is one that he believes is very important, because it goes right to the situation we were talking about yesterday and that you raise, and that is that it simply, as a matter of...
147
147
Oct 11, 2012
10/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 147
favorite 0
quote 0
we have our own buffett rule in massachusetts. we have an opportunity for people who want to pay more. they can. professor warren chose not to check that box and make that contribution. it is ok to take everybody else's money, but before we do that, we need to practice what we preach. when you talk about oil and our energy producers, i am not sure anybody has been to the pump. it is about $4 a gallon. if you think by eliminating deductions or raising taxes on our energy producers in the middle of the winter, they will pass those tax increases off to you. you will be paying more as you fill up your car, your oil tanks, and we need to have a comprehensive reform. we need to do a review of our tax code. we need to work it out together. we cannot be pitting people against each other. bipartisan manner. i have done it. i will continue to do it. i am proud. >> 30 seconds. ms. wawrren? -- warren? >> i think i heard senator brown say that instead of working for the people of massachusetts, he grover norquist to make sure no tax still occu
we have our own buffett rule in massachusetts. we have an opportunity for people who want to pay more. they can. professor warren chose not to check that box and make that contribution. it is ok to take everybody else's money, but before we do that, we need to practice what we preach. when you talk about oil and our energy producers, i am not sure anybody has been to the pump. it is about $4 a gallon. if you think by eliminating deductions or raising taxes on our energy producers in the middle...